Editorial: 'None of the above' option for elections

Monday

Jul 23, 2007 at 12:01 AMJul 23, 2007 at 11:15 PM

Perhaps nothing symbolizes the cynicism and mean-spiritedness that has been spawned by talk radio and vapid television bomb-throwers than a proposal on Beacon Hill to add a binding option on state and local ballots for “None of the above, for a new election.”

The Patriot Ledger

Perhaps nothing symbolizes the cynicism and mean-spiritedness that has been spawned by talk radio and vapid television bomb-throwers than a proposal on Beacon Hill to add a binding option on state and local ballots for “None of the above, for a new election.”

If NOTA, as the option is called in the two bills from a pair of Cape lawmakers, gets the most votes, then another election will have to be held within two to three months. Anyone who is beaten by NOTA would be ineligible to run in the next election.

It is frightening to think of the abuse such an option could wreak on state and local government.

The measure is the work of William White, a retired systems analyst from Dennis. White said his motivation was his frustration at going into the voting booth and being unenamored with his choices.

White also said the bill would make unchallenged incumbents more accountable and might trigger more opposition.

“The fundamental idea is that all legitimate consent requires the ability to withhold consent,” White said after he testified before the Joint Committee on Election Laws last week. “Putting `none of the above’ on a ballot would allow voters to withhold their consent.”

Voters can already withhold their consent by not going to the polls. What this measure would do is wreak havoc and open up a solemn duty and right to mischief beyond belief.

And that doesn’t even address the thousands of dollars cities and towns would have to pay to run a second election.

Under the bill, the governor or local board of selectmen would have the power to appoint temporary officeholders if NOTA prevailed. Governor would be filled by a vote of the Legislature.

Do you think that process might be a tad ripe for political shenanigans?

If a state representative or senator was not elected or U.S. rep or senator, that position would go unfilled until the NOTA, so-called, election. So it’s conceivable that we would have no one in office.

In a presidential election, NOTA votes would still be counted but the candidate with the highest total would still be the winner.

For some reason, elected officials at all levels have become the target of vitriol from voters, driven mainly by the proliferation of unaccountable critics who think nothing of painting the entire system with a broad brush of innuendo and usually unsubstantiated and unprovable allegations.

This bill, fortunately, will die a quick death. What needs to be addressed, though, is the growing disenchantment of voters at all levels.

We’ll repeat that you already have the option of not voting if you don’t like the choices. Let’s give you another – run for office yourself. That would improve the quality of candidates, wouldn’t it?